Kenneth Whistler <email@example.com> wrote:
> There are no guarantees, but no one in the UTC or WG2 is competing to
> create a longer name. There are no specified length limits in the
> naming rules that WG2 follows, but the committee has watchdogs who
> try to keep the names shorter, when possible. Furthermore, since the
> longest existing names are compatibility Arabic ligatures, and since
> WG2 has vowed not to encode any more Arabic ligatures, we are unlikely
> to see longer names.
That was my assumption as well. Look at the champion so far:
1. ARABIC LIGATURE UIGHUR KIRGHIZ YEH...
2. ... WITH HAMZA ABOVE...
3. ... WITH ALEF MAKSURA...
4. ... ISOLATED FORM
Only the first line refers to a base character. The second and third
lines represent precomposition, and the fourth line shows that this is a
glyph rather than a true character. Since precomposed characters and
glyphs are both discouraged from future encoding, it is unlikely we will
see any more names in a format like this.
On the other hand, as new scripts are added to Unicode (perhaps in the
Astral Planes), new requirements for differentiating characters will
emerge that could result in long names, as evidenced by U+1426 CANADIAN
SYLLABICS FINAL DOUBLE SHORT VERTICAL STROKES.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT